On Wed, 2016-06-15 at 16:59 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote: > On Wed, 2016-06-15 at 12:19 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > On Tue, 2016-06-14 at 22:02 +0200, Igor Gnatenko wrote: > > > When DNF will be able to install flatpack pkgs then we can stop > > > supporting > > > distro packages for that. > > > > One of the things I am working on is making access to sources, > > symbols > > and debuginfo easier for rpm packages as distributed by Fedora. That > > helps users profiling, debugging and tracing the things they run on > > their systems. For some background see: > > https://gnu.wildebeest.org/blog/mjw/2016/02/02/where-are-your-symbols > > -debuginfo-and-sources/ > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ParallelInstallableDebuginfo > > Flatpak supports something called "extensions", where an app (or a > runtime) can specify extension points which are then optionally there > when running the app. One use of this in flatpak is debuginfo > extensions for the case above (another is locale data). Also, if you > use flatpak-builder to build your app then these are automatically > built for you, similar to how rpm does it (which support for was also > written by me).
O! I see in builder/builder-utils.c "This code is based on debugedit.c from rpm". And I am just hacking on that for rpm (see some patches on rpm-ma...@rpm.org). Maybe it is an idea to extract that code and provide a "standalone" debugedit program that different packaging programs (rpmbuild, flatpak-builder, ...) could use to collect build-ids and debuginfo source path cleanups? What would be a good list to discuss that? rpm-ecosystem, flatpak-devel? Thanks, Mark -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
